"...Bishop was a suspect in the attempted bombing of Dr. Paul Rosenberg, who received a double-pipe bomb in the mail on Dec. 19, 1993. ...She said Bishop “grinned” as she described being asked by cops whether she’d ever taken stamps off an envelope and fastened them onto something else. “I cannot tell you what the grin meant,” Fluckiger said."

A former auto-body worker claims Amy Bishop put a gun to his chest and demanded a getaway car just minutes after she shot her brother to death 24 years ago in a controversial case that is now being reviewed.

The more we learn about this woman, the stranger her story becomes. Why did the attorney general in Massachusetts protect her back then? Why did police not investigate further into the attempted mail bombing?

How is it this woman, who appears at least to be unbalanced and possibly psychotic, has remained free all these years?

How is it this woman, who appears at least to be unbalanced and possibly psychotic, has remained free all these years?

She worked in higher (so called) learning environments: an insular bubble full of left leaning liberal loons who are obsessive, narrow minded,lack social skills or any concept of reality outside of thier bubble.

Except for the fact that they have tenure and she didn't...she fit in quite well.

If she worked at the local diner or check out stand at the grocery store, she would have been canned long ago.

As we reported yesterday, Gregory Girard, a Manchester technology consultant, was found with a stash of military grade weapons, explosive devices including tear gas and pepper ball canisters, camouflage clothing, knives, handcuffs, bulletproof vests and helmets, and night vision goggles, say police. They believe Girard, who pleaded not guilty at his arraignment, was "preparing for domestic and political turmoil," and feared martial law would soon be imposed.

I believe that the ONLY ----- ONLY ------ potential presidental (sic) candidate I have seen with the sheer force of will and God-insprined (sic) rightous (sic) determination to bringdown (sic) this "War Powers" evil is Sarah Palin.

The thing I don't understand is why failing to get tenure set her off. Apparently she and her husband had developed some piece of equipment (I don't pretend to understand the science of it) that needed funding to get off the ground. There was potentially big money if they could market it. Maybe this is naive of me but wouldn't shopping it around to companies succeed or fail independent of whether the academic behind the device had tenure?

It seems that the concept of tenure is not working since there is little diversity in faculty. How many far right Professors are there? You don't really need tenure when your colleagues mostly agree with you.

It seems that the concept of tenure is not working since there is little diversity in faculty. How many far right Professors are there? You don't really need tenure when your colleagues mostly agree with you.

I'm not sure that's particularly pertinent here. She seems to have been a far-left wacko, after all, not a rightist at all. I don't see any reason to believe her politics had anything to do with the tenure denial.

That said, the portrait that emerges is kind of weird and contradictory. She's said to have had no friends, to have been kind of creepy, etc. etc., but, well, she got married at some point, and has a bunch of children. And she and her husband seem to have been reasonably successful to boot -- not dysfunctional. How odd and friendless can she really have been?

Can we stipulate that crazies on the right get prosecuted to the full extent of the law while crazies on the left get away (literally in this case) with murder? And do so with the aid of lefties in high places?

Did he have tenure (and a guaranteed for life job) as a member of the faculty at a University? Or is he an independent (and whacked out) businessman who will probably never have another job in his field?

And...yes, I concur.

There are loonies everywhere. They just seem to be more concentrated in the academia setting. Maybe that's a good thing. Keep them corralled together.

I think that again people are knee jerking to calling this a left wing/right wing matter.

The point, which people keep determinedly missing, is not merely that this woman is a crazy killer.

It's that she got away with murder with the aid of the Democratic machine in Massachusetts, including a current Congressman, which covered up her crime. That's what the "there are crazies on both sides" fetishists are not getting.

Anything more than a cursory skim of McVeigh's ideology shows him not to be right wing in any legitimate sense of the word. He was anti-American, who identified with the Iraqi's he fought. Our government was immoral for all the usual reasons, money, we don't actively "help the poor", of course the undercurrent of all of it is that it would require a much more authoritarian government than we have to do all the good things McVeigh, and the Anti-American nutjobs want.

That isn't to say McVeigh was left-wing either. He didn't have enough of a coherent philosophical belieft to qualify as one or the other, but he seemed to want a similar Mommy style government as Kaczynski.

"Gregory D. Girard, 45, was arrested Tuesday night and charged with storing several tear-gas grenades and explosive pepper-ball projectiles. He was also charged with illegal possession of four police batons."

Oh, scary. How many batons could he use at one time? How long to kill three people with them?

One of the points not yet mentioned is the fact that a great many of the head cases posing as faculty on college campuses regularly talk of so-and-so ought to be shot, blown up with his own bombs, etc., going all the way back to the Vietnam War (I had a couple of profs like that). Amy Bishop was unstable enough, violent enough, and immoral enough to go the next step. Which says a lot about the corruption of the Kennedy machine; cops in the People's Republic have to check with Hyannispawt before they run in a jaywalker.

As for garage and his 'for every one on the left, there's one on the right' business, it doesn't seem to hold water. As noted, the righties get prosecuted regularly, sometimes on the mere appearance of an indication. More to the point, the righties have to hold a real job, so they get spotted a lot sooner.

In regard to Ann's challenge to guess the nameless Obamatron, the list appears to be getting shorter and shorter, largely due to some people finally waking up. The ones left after November, however, will probably be a scary lot.

This sounds like most of Obama's followers - guys like Bill Ayers, who, if they can't get what they want, will bomb or murder anyone standing in their way to get what they want ... to make America in their image.

That's the Chicago Way ... no? Kill people? Harass, yes, bully yes ... but in the end, if you have to, fucking whack 'em?

It's that she got away with murder with the aid of the Democratic machine in Massachusetts, including a current Congressman, which covered up her crime.

I don't think this has anything specifically to do with Democrats. It's easy to imagine, say, Huckabee doing the same kind of thing. If there's a political angle there, it's common-or-garden machine politics, of the Chicago or New York schools.

The thing I don't understand is why failing to get tenure set her off.

Academia -- at least science and engineering academia -- is a ruthless winnowing process. You have to be very bright and hardworking to get into graduate school, vbh to get your PhD, vbh to get a tenure track job, vbh to get tenure. If you miss a step, you have failed. Amy Bishop, despite her Harvard PhD, is a failure because she did not get tenure. (She would again be a failure if she didn't get promoted to full Professor.)

But getting tenure is tough. Of the eleven assistant profs in my dept. when I was in graduate school, only one got tenure. Another one got tenure at a lesser school. If you don't get tenure at UAH, there is no lesser school, unfortunately.

Your friends at lefty sites such as Talking Points Memo certainly seem to want to paint every lone whacko even remotely associated with the Tea Party as representative of the whole.

That's a different point, though -- that's not the the Democratic or Republican party, per se, but ordinary activists of the Right, Left, or (with the Tea Party) of the anti-Left. And yes, there's a bias in media presentation there -- if Ayers had been an abortion clinic bomber rather than a man out to kill the "right" sort of victim, Obama would have been an untouchable in national politics -- but that's not what I'm talking about.

Delahunt may have intervened to help her out in a partisan way, but I don't think that has to do with Democrats. There's nothing about the Democrats that makes them more willing to countenance murder, or sweep it under the rug. That's just machine politics and corruption, not a Democrat/Republican thing. Because of the Democrats' strength in degenerate urban politics, it's possible that there's more Democrats involved in this sort of thing than Republicans, but that still doesn't make it somehow a Democratic party thing.

I don't think this has anything specifically to do with Democrats. It's easy to imagine, say, Huckabee doing the same kind of thing.

No. No, it's not. It's not easy to imagine Huckabee or anyone else covering up a murder. And it's a pathetic to see how some commenters here are willing to brush a murder and its coverup under the rug.

Crimes were committed here. Serious crimes, not infantile bullshit like somebody having a flaregun in their house. Crimes committed by people currently free and clear and sitting in high office.

Delahunt may have intervened to help her out in a partisan way, but I don't think that has to do with Democrats. There's nothing about the Democrats that makes them more willing to countenance murder, or sweep it under the rug.

Some people have a staggering ability to not see what's in front of their eyeballs.

Huckabee, specifically, is easy for me to imagine, because in his zeal to show clemency, he let go at least one murderer over the objections of harder hearts. One recidivist murderer. He is not a man with sound judgment in these matters.

And it's a pathetic to see how some commenters here are willing to brush a murder and its coverup under the rug.

Is anyone saying we should brush this under the rug? If Delahunt did intervene to help out a political ally's child, then sure, he should be raked over the coals. And the woman here -- if she's a fratricide along with being a triple murderess -- ought to be executed.

But this isn't an indictment of the Democratic party, or Democrats, or Leftists in general, any more than one of those increasingly rare abortion clinic bomber is an indictment of the Right as a whole. It's idiotic when the media start hyperventillating over the risk that Rightists with their guns and their oppressive conservatism will turn to violence. And it's idiotic to hyperventillate over the prospect that Leftists with their, uh, pipe bombs and their demented social theories will turn to violence. Sure, there have been violent leftist movements in the past (see, e.g. Obama's chum, the despicable William Ayers). But that doesn't mean that every Leftist or Leftist movement is pregnant with violence.

Huckabee, specifically, is easy for me to imagine, because in his zeal to show clemency, he let go at least one murderer over the objections of harder hearts. One recidivist murderer. He is not a man with sound judgment in these matters.

1) Huckabee did not "let go at least one murder over the objections of harder hearts" You are presumably thinking of Maurice Clemmons. Clemmons was in jail for assault, not for murder. So you have your basic facts wrong.

2) There is a world of difference between a governor exercising his pardon power on a person guilty of a crime, and a person who conspires to cover up a murder. Among other things, the second case is a serious crime while the first is perfectly legal.

1) Huckabee did not "let go at least one murder over the objections of harder hearts" You are presumably thinking of Maurice Clemmons. Clemmons was in jail for assault, not for murder. So you have your basic facts wrong.

And Wayne Dumond, who was rape not murder. So fair enough -- they weren't murderers, just violent criminals who turned to murder once he let them out.

Now the State will be stuck with her forever, paying for her incarceration. This is why the death penalty should be mandatory for cases like this.

A distinction without a difference, sometimes. A prisoner on death row in Arizona just died of old age. The 94 year old Viva Leroy Nash was sentenced to death in 1983, for a murder he committed at the age of 67. He filed appeals from 1985 to 2006.

But then we look at the lefty web sites and see what the folks at - to use one example - Talking Points Memo are doing.

They're specifically using Yellow Journalism to try to paint membership in the Tea Party as the Scarlett Letter of nutjobbery. Every lone whackjob they can find to try to paint the entire organization as the home of the nutty right is made a poster boy.

And so, two can play at that game. If you Democrats want to play that game, then we're happy to play it.

Game on.

There's only one political party that is home to the Chicago Way of violent politics - where terrorist bombing is seen as a way to introduce yourself politically (ala Bill Ayers). And that's the Democrat Party. If you're a violent scumbag, then the Democrats have a place for you in their tent.

The Democrat Party is the party of murderers like Amy Bishop and the party of her enablers like Bill Delahunt.

If you don't mind beating a black man like a yard dog at a Democrat Town Hall meeting, or killing people who won't grant you tenure, then the Democrat Party is the place for you.

Depresing how many idiots here seize on the political construct - as if someones politics somehow explain abhorrent acts.

Madison Man had a different perspective that I will respond to:

MadisonMan said... It's Obama's fault!And the mother of four kids to boot. I feel just tremendously sorry for her kids. To go through this kind of thing! (shudder)

I believe to the contrary. If there is any small mercy, any silver lining in this madwoman's bloodbath - it is her kids and to a much lesser degree, her students - that are now spared of her malignant influence.

The optimal thing would have been if she was stopped when she should have been stopped - up in Massachusetts.

Stand by for the "digging and fascination effect" media effort. This case has legs. Mystery, powerful Mass people covering things up, corrupt police, bombs, brilliant but ugly women (Hollywood will fix the ugly part when the movie comes out), bizarre behavior, Lefty politics, campus bloodbath, perhaps a multimillion dollar invention that will add to the plot.......

Ted Kaczynski, but with tits and a far lusher background of train wreckage and lost potential and bad cops, politicians, campus tenure barons....

Was Teddy a basically decent man who panicked in an emergency? Or was he a cold-blooder murderer who drowned a lover who had become inconvenient, trying to make it look like an accident?

I'm inclined to think he was a one-time fuckup, probably drunk on his ass, with the deficit of coping skills that entails, because a murderer would not have tied himself so blatantly and thoroughly and permanently to Mary Jo's death.

What would have been his motive? What was the worst that could have happened had Mary Jo lived? That she would have popped out a baby? She could have given it to the nuns, who would have found it a loving home. She could have married some schlub who didn't mind a ready-made family. Imagine the secret joy of a Kennedy groupie to actually give birth to a Kennedy baby. Would someone pollinated by Mick Jagger complain?